get_latest_news

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It implies read-only behavior ('get') and provides helpful context around the `include_url` parameter to save tokens, but does not explicitly state the operation is non-mutating, nor disclose potential rate limits, pagination, or error behavior. The display suggestions add behavioral context, but overall transparency is moderate.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured: first a clear purpose, then Args, Returns, and a final '数据展示建议' section. It is slightly verbose with the display suggestions, but those are valuable operational guidance. The core tool description (excluding suggestions) is concise.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has an output schema (not shown) so return format need not be detailed. The description covers purpose, parameters, and usage guidelines. It lacks explicit mention of when not to use and alternatives, but for a straightforward retrieval tool with three optional params, it is sufficiently complete. The display suggestions add practical context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% (no descriptions in the input schema), but the description compensates fully by explaining each parameter with examples ('platforms: 平台ID列表，如 [\'zhihu\', \'weibo\']', 'limit: 默认50，最大1000', 'include_url: 默认False（节省token）'). This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema, making parameter usage clear.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's function: 'Get the latest batch of crawled news data' and purpose 'quickly understand current hot topics'. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from siblings like get_latest_rss or search_news, making the purpose unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description includes a '数据展示建议' (data display suggestions) section that guides how to present results (show all by default, summarize only on user request, etc.), and explains default platform behavior. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives like get_trending_topics or get_news_by_date, or any exclusion criteria.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.